Author's Keywords: Shame, Plato, Aristotle, Rhetoric, Truth	Convention All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs. Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: The Midwest Political Science Association URL: http://www.indiana.edu/~mpsa/
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p84009_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Sokolon, Marlene. "The Role of Shame in Plato's Dialogues: Understanding Platonic Philosophy Through the Lens of Aristotle's Rhetoric" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Midwest Political Science Association, Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, Illinois, Apr 15, 2004 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p84009_index.html>

Sokolon, M. , 2004-04-15 "The Role of Shame in Plato's Dialogues: Understanding Platonic Philosophy Through the Lens of Aristotle's Rhetoric" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Midwest Political Science Association, Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, Illinois Online <.PDF>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p84009_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: In this paper, I explore the role of shame in understanding the confrontation between a philosopher and the customs and laws of a political system. Specifically, the paper is divided into three main sections. The first section examines the significance of shame in two of Plato's dialogues; the Crito and the Gorgias. I selected these two dialogues because they represent two different dialogic contexts. In the Crito, Plato presents a private dialogue between two old and dear friends. An underlying theme of Crito is the role of shame and reputation as a sanction or motivator of action in questions of justice. In a typical Socratic conclusion, the dialogue emphasizes that a sense of shame before the opinions of the many matters little in comparison with one's reputation before the true expert. In contrast, the context of the Gorgias is a dialogue between Socrates and three interlocutors in front of an audience. An underlying theme of this dialogue, especially in the conversation between Socrates and Callicles, is the association between shame and truthfulness. Although Callicles boasts his discussion will not be constrained by false shame, it is only Socrates who is willing to express truthfulness in front of the young men, unimpeded by a sense of shame. In the second section, I explore how Aristotle's understanding of shame and shamelessness sheds light on the relevance of shame in Plato's two dialogues. In the Rhetoric, Aristotle also examines the connection between shame and opinion. According to Aristotle, shame is a sort of pain or agitation concerning things that seem to bring an individual into disrespect. In particular, Aristotle distinguishes between two kinds of disgraceful things that can bring about disrespect. In front of friends and familiars, human beings feel shame for truly (aletheian) disgraceful things; however, in front of strangers, we feel shame for that which is merely disgraceful due to custom (nomos) or opinion (doxa). Hence, the individual concerned only with truth and indifferent to shame associated with challenging customary disgrace is, in fact, our friend. Those who remain constrained by opinion and custom remain strangers. The final section considers the implications of Plato's formula, which connects false shame with opinion and expert knowledge with truth, in light of Aristotle's discussion. The true expert concerning justice would be someone who challenges the conventional justice of the city, without the constraint of shame and concern for his reputation with the people. In comparison, those who remain constrained by shame and reputation remain equally constrained by notions of customary justice. For anyone interested in truth and justice, in the expert we find not only challenges to our conventional notions of justice, but also in his questioning, the city finds its only true friend.

Callicles, Socrates, and the Danger of Relativism in Plato's Gorgias

Who’s Truth? Who’s Justice? Culture and Transitional Justice

Finding Shame in Truth: The Importance of Public Engagement in Truth Commissions